Yet Another "Garage Ripped Me Off" Dilemma

I recently booked my car in for a timing chain replacement, quoted at £250-450. On the day it was to be dropped off, it also developed an oil leak and a warning light. I mentioned this to them. I had no contact all day, and at the end of the day they told me the timing chain job was £575 because more parts had needed replacing, and the oil leak was a big job (crankshaft seal) that they hadn't done but which will need doing soon and will cost several hundred as well.

The dilemma: is not contacting me first about the oil leak a misleading omission as described by the CPR 2008 (given that the vehicle was purchased from them 8 months ago for £1200 and is worth no more than that, and I would not have agreed to any of the work if I'd known the total projected costs, as I feel they should have clearly known)? Do I have to pay for this job given that omission? (And even if I don't, do you think morally I ought to pay for it?)

And secondly, if I do, is the telephone quote of £250-450 binding or do I have to pay them £575?

I don't know where you stand legally, but whenever I take a car in I'm insistent on getting a quote for the work done. Then, if either the job ends up requiring more parts/labour than quoted, or another issue is discovered I am to be contacted before any further work takes place.

The hard part for garages is that they often have to take everything apart to find the root of a problem.

I mean I wouldn't think the 'quote' is legally binding, but the fact they did significant extra work to the car without calling to confirm is a big no-no in my opinion.
Last time I took the car in because of a warning light, they rang to say it was x and would cost y, I went away and had a cry, then came back and said sure because it was easiest haha. They also topped up some oil without telling me in advance, but that was less than £10 and needed doing so I didn't mind.

Whilst I don't know what you can do about this time, I know you can avoid them moving forward

The root of their argument in defense of the extra repairs is "we already had it apart and the parts needed replacing, and it's costing us all the time it's on the ramp", which I can sympathize with in itself but legally it's absolutely not my problem. My feeling is that if there was a reasonable possibility of those other parts going, they should've known (again, their vehicle, 8 months ago) and factored that into the quote.

I just spoke to Which? Legal, and apparently CRA 2015 means that this may all fall under 'satisfactory quality of goods' from when I bought it - after 6 months the burden of proof shifts to me, but they said that if the extras were parts that a garage would reasonably know were on their way out when the vehicle was sold, I may not be liable for the cost of fixing them at all. The tricky part will be proving that - apparently getting the word of other garages on this is the way to do it.

The tricky part will be proving that - apparently getting the word of other garages on this is the way to do it.

Click to expand...

Bingo. Bring the car (AND any parts that were removed for replacement, asking the current garage for those is usually a good habit anyway) to an independent mechanic, and get their opinion. If their opinion is that the failure should have been known at the time of sale, and/or that the 'other parts' that were replaced with the timing chain (maybe chain tensioners or guides) would have been reasonably expected to fail at a similar time to the cam chain, then get that in writing and bring it to the dealer.

They allege that they tried to call me but couldn't get through. This is rather odd because I have two phone lines, both were working that day (customers called, none were on for ages), both have answer machines, no messages left.

Other garages seem to think the prices they're talking about are reasonable. They also confirm, though, that one could easily diagnose the crankshaft oil seal leak without starting any work. So they either didn't bother to look first, or they saw it and carried on with the work without checking with me. Or they tried to call but only tried once and didn't leave a message (which to me is as good as not bothering).

I'm having trouble getting an opinion on whether this sort of thing would've been likely to be pre-existing when I bought the vehicle - I've taken it from 44k miles to 50k, which is a rather critical service interval. So while the garage should in good conscience have told me that big service stages were on the horizon when they sold it, they might not be legally in the wrong. If the parts were fine when I bought it and I put the wear and tear on them, I think it's legally my cost to bear.

Still waiting on one more expert opinion, soon as I can get hold of him.

Just wanted to post a reply for posterity on this one: the car is now fixed. My mechanic friend, now retired, talked me down and put a whole new perspective on things.
His argument, in a nutshell, was basically this:
"You paid £1200 for that car. Which basically means it's a banger. With bangers you sometimes get lucky and they run fine, but if they don't, that's just the risk you take. You saved a lot of money up front by buying this car and not a £2k car with similar mileage.
We inspected it when you bought it, and we haggled him down on the basis that it was a bit rattly, which legally probably means that you've accepted the car as is; he could easily argue that we accepted possible faults like this by haggling him down, because we did.
Even if that weren't the case, the legal angle is a waste of time. Legal advisers and lawyers will always tell you a lovely song and dance about your rights and how much you could gain, but that's just their job; for small things like this, it's just a big waste of time, you never get your money back, and you've lost a mechanic. This chap is also one of your customers, so you'd lose a customer too.
People like to get upset about cars, but at the end of the day, motoring is not cheap. You've had 8 months out of it; a £570 repair isn't the end of the world. You can't buy another car for £570. You can't even lease a decent car for how much this one has cost you so far per month. And once this timing chain is fixed, the car's otherwise fine, isn't it?
It is annoying that they underquoted. Say that. Go and calmly explain that you're not happy that they underquoted, and that you were expecting it to be less. You can also reasonably say that you expect everything to be right with it now. And then pay him. Because it's still worth doing, and it's still a better car for the money you've spent than you'll get anywhere else right now."

He was entirely correct, and basically everything else was me getting in a stew over the fact that I'm poor. The actual work was fine, and the logic of the guy doing the work carrying on with it was quite correct; once he got in there, his options were 1) roll the car off the ramp, in bits, and await further instructions or 2) finish the job. The second choice was the right one given the context. The only problem, really, was the original quote being so far off. You don't get a timing chain kit done for £250, that's just fantastic. £500 is about right.

I talked to them, explained it was a blow getting such a big bill after the original quote was so low. He understood and knocked £60 off as a goodwill gesture. We're still friends; I still have a mechanic; the car's running fine.

There is a lesson here for posterity, if anyone ever reads this. You're not Ace Attorney. You're not going to get your money back by going legal (unless you're talking about thousands). Most people want to sort things out. Most aggravations are misunderstandings or miscommunications. And when you're hot and bothered about some perceived injustice, your friends and loved ones will generally help you to sustain that feeling of injury, because it's very difficult to turn around to someone and say "actually I think company X might not be in the wrong here, maybe it's just that Y". We're hardwired to think of businesses and companies as the enemy, as a force trying to trick or con us, which is sometimes - but not usually - the case.

TL;DR: I ate a big slice of humble pie and paid to get my car fixed, because it wasn't a big deal.